Assam: 81 ‘anti-nationals' arrested for ‘sympathising' with Pakistan after Pahalgam attack, says CM
The Bharatiya Janata Party leader said that the latest arrests included a person named Mohammed Dilbar Hussain from Sonitpur and another named Hafizur Rahman from Kamrup. 'Our systems are constantly tracking anti-national posts on social media and taking action,' he added on X.
The attack at Baisaran near Pahalgam town on April 22 left 26 persons dead and 17 injured. The terrorists targeted tourists after asking their names to ascertain their religion, the police said. All but three of those killed were Hindu.
Since the attack, the BJP government in Assam has been arresting persons accused of 'defending Pakistan' through social media posts or public remarks.
81 Anti-Nationals are now behind bars for sympathising with Pak | #Update | 1 June
1️⃣ @SonitpurPolice arrested Md Dilbar Hussain
2️⃣ @KamrupPolice arrested Hafizur Rahman
Our systems are constantly tracking anti-national posts on social media and taking actions.
— Himanta Biswa Sarma (@himantabiswa) June 1, 2025
On April 24, Sarma had said that the state would take action against anyone directly or indirectly defending the 'horrific, Pakistan-sponsored terror attack in Pahalgam'.
This came after Opposition All India United Democratic Front MLA Aminul Islam was arrested on sedition charges for claiming that the Pahalgam attack and the 2019 Pulwama attack may have been the results of conspiracies by Bharatiya Janata Party leaders.
Islam got bail in the sedition case on May 14, but was detained again under the National Security Act on the same day, PTI reported.
The Act allows for long periods of detention without trial and suspends important rights of the accused person, including the right to legal representation and immediate information about the cause of the arrest.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
28 minutes ago
- Hans India
SP MLA Pooja Pal Expelled After Praising UP CM Yogi Adityanath Over Husband's Murder Case
Samajwadi Party MLA Pooja Pal was expelled from the party after she thanked Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath for delivering justice in her husband's murder case. The party's leader, Akhilesh Yadav, stated that she had violated party rules and as a result, she is banned from participating in any future party activities. Pooja Pal's husband, Raju Pal, was murdered in 2005 due to a political rivalry involving gangster Atiq Ahmed's family. Recently, Atiq Ahmed and his brother Ashraf were killed in police custody, which added to the ongoing political tensions. In the legislative assembly, Pooja Pal openly praised the Chief Minister's strong action against criminals, which sparked controversy within her party. The BJP accused the Samajwadi Party of being anti-Dalit for punishing Pooja Pal, suggesting that the party was not supportive of Dalit voices. Meanwhile, in 2024, the Central Bureau of Investigation convicted seven people for the murder of Raju Pal, affirming that justice was served in the case. A government inquiry found no police negligence in the deaths of Atiq and Ashraf, and the state government assured the Supreme Court of a fair investigation into the matter. This entire episode highlights the complex political dynamics and the sensitive intersection of crime and justice in Uttar Pradesh politics
Indian Express
28 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Such measures do not unite people…': Raj Thackeray slams August 15 meat sale ban, backs HC's pigeon-feeding order
Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) chief Raj Thackeray on Thursday criticised the BJP-led state government over its decision to ban the sale of meat on Independence Day and also endorsed the Bombay High Court's order banning pigeon feeding, accusing the police of not acting during the recent protests at the Dadar Kabutarkhana. 'On a day we celebrate freedom, people's freedom is being taken away. The government should not decide who should eat what. These rights are neither with the government nor the municipal corporation,' Thackeray said, reacting to the Kalyan-Dombivli Municipal Corporation order to close slaughterhouses and stop meat sales on August 15. Thackeray said he had instructed MNS workers to ensure that meat sales go ahead on Thursday. While KDMC Commissioner Abhinav Goyal clarified that the order applied only to the sale of meat, and not consumption, similar restrictions have been announced by civic bodies in Nagpur, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar and Ichalkaranji. Thackeray linked the meat ban to what he called divisive policies by the BJP, citing the state government's encouragement of pigeon feeding and its bid to introduce compulsory Hindi at the primary level. 'Such measures do not unite people, they divide them,' he said. On the closure of the Dadar Kabutarkhana following a high court directive, Thackeray said the order was binding on all communities. 'Jain monks must also understand the dangers posed by pigeons. Doctors have explained the diseases they cause. If anyone violates the ban on feeding them, the police should take action. Those who protested against the closure at Dadar should also have faced police action,' he said. The MNS chief also targeted state minister Mangal Prabhat Lodha, who had suggested alternatives to the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) on the issue. 'Lodha is not a minister for one community; he is a minister for the state. He must also respect the court's decision,' Thackeray said. Accusing the police of selective enforcement, Thackeray alleged that while members of the Marathi Ekikaran Committee were booked for a protest earlier this week, no action was taken against those who 'came with knives and sharp objects' to damage the tarpaulin put up by the BMC to prevent pigeons from gathering at the kabutarkhana. 'Police cannot act against one group and spare another. Those who took the law into their own hands should be booked,' he said. Meanwhile, Jain monk Nileshchandra Vijay appealed to Thackeray to help ease tensions between the Marathi and Marwari communities, praising him as a 'Marathi Hinduhriday Samrat' and pledging the Marwari community's support for his stand on protecting the Marathi language. 'Take a stand against anyone who insults Marathi or refuses to respect it, and we will stand by you,' he said. The monk also apologised to the Marathi community, saying there had been a misunderstanding involving the Marathi Ekikaran Samiti. Meanwhile, Thackeray on Thursday held a meeting of MNS workers during which he instructed them to start preparing for the upcoming civic polls and also instructed the cadre and party office bearers to scrutinise the voters' list. Thackeray also asserted that in Mumbai, only MNS and Shiv Sena (UBT) have a strong grassroots presence, and the MNS will emerge victorious in the upcoming polls. The statement came amid speculation of an alliance between the Shiv Sena (UBT) and the MNS.
Hindustan Times
28 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Interfaith marriage a matter of personal liberty, says Delhi HC on couple's petition
New Delhi: An individual's choice to marry someone from a different faith is safeguarded under the fundamental right to life and personal liberty, even if it challenges social norms and family expectations, the Delhi high court has observed on a petition by an interfaith couple. In their petition, the couple stated that they had solemnised their marriage after a relationship of over seven years but were facing strong opposition from the woman's family (Representative photo) The court also ordered the city police to submit a report on allegations that police officers forcibly separated the couple in July and detained the woman at a state-run shelter home. The Delhi police, which was told to ensure the couple's safety at its hearing on July 25, has been asked to continue providing them with police protection. A bench of justice Sanjeev Narula heard the matter on August 8, following a plea filed last month by a 26-year-old Muslim man and a 25-year-old Hindu woman. In their petition, the couple stated that they had solemnised their marriage after a relationship of over seven years but were facing strong opposition from the woman's family. They added that although they had written to the Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP), South-East district, on July 23 requesting police protection, the police had forcibly separated the woman from her husband and detained her at Nirmal Chhaya Shelter Home on July 24. The police maintained that no coercion, unlawful action, or procedural lapse had taken place. Noting the couple's allegation of being forcibly separated, the court directed the DCP to submit a report on whether any unlawful separation had occurred and to identify the officer responsible, if any. The plea further said that the woman had taken the decision to marry voluntarily, without any coercion. The court directed the Delhi Police to continue providing them protection and accommodation in a safe house until they solemnise their marriage under the Special Marriage Act. Meanwhile, the father's lawyer asserted that his client was deeply troubled by the fact that his daughter had taken the decision to marry the man without his consent. He further submitted that he was concerned for his daughter's welfare. The bench said that a parent's anguish over their daughter choosing her life partner without consultation cannot eclipse the right of an adult to choose a life partner, since Article 21 of the Constitution safeguards an individual's right to marry a person of one's choice. 'The constitutional guarantee under Article 21 enables every adult citizen [to] shape the course of their own life, free from fear, coercion or unlawful restraint. The choice to marry, especially across lines of faith, may test the resilience of social norms and familial expectations, yet in law, it remains a matter of personal liberty and individual autonomy, immune from any external veto. While the anguish of a parent is understandable, it cannot eclipse the rights of a major to select their life partner,' the court said. 'The Court is mindful of the anguish of the girl's father, who opposes the relationship on grounds that he perceives as legitimate and rooted in his concern for his daughter's welfare. However, upon attaining the age of majority, the right to make decisions regarding marriage becomes the individual's personal prerogative. Parental preference, however well-intentioned, cannot legally override that autonomy,' it added. The matter will be next heard on September 12.
